Our shelter in place just got extended through May 30 and people are DONE

[Matryoshka]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

Extrapolating:  Bystander CPR may become no longer a thing.  First aid courses are going to have to change their content - full PPE in the AED cabinet? And training time on how to use it.

I saw a clip on the news about a beach somewhere that the lifeguards were still supposed to rescue from water and if necessary give chest compressions, but not mouth-to-mouth; for that they said they had EMTs nearby for backup.

[Wheres Toto]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

Yep, I agree -- there seems to be evidence that outdoor gatherings like this are 

a) the thing that draws the most ire 

and 

b) aren't actually a big driver of spread. 

I wonder if they draw the most ire because it's the gatherings that other people can see.   A huge gathering in your house, or even in your backyard, won't be noticed by as many people.   Lots of ire about the protests, but I kind of think that is deserved.    I'm also seeing ire about church gatherings.  Again, is it because those are the ones we hear about?  

2 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Because the US hasn't done consistent contact tracing, we don't have firm numbers on spikes from certain events.  I have seen though people do their own reports of having gotten sick at various parties.  If they hadn't done that (usually because it has changed their mind on the virus and now they are warning people of the dangers) we wouldn't really know. 

Also - it is a huge crap shoot.  You could have a party with a bunch of people with no COVID to spread.  So no matter how many droplets are in the air, they won't be COVID droplets.  You could have another event with a number of COVID spreaders.  Or you could have a super spreader at one event.  Temperature checks are (as far as I've read) pretty useless for identifying who might be spreading this invisible virus.  Now I'm not a gambler but it seems to me that the odds go up when you get a group of people who don't care about the virus in any setting - because that increases the potential that they are carriers.  And if you have a group of likeminded people then you might have more than one carrier, which increases the chances of them spreading it to any one individual. 

On this or another thread, there was some talk about places hitting ICU capacity or big spikes, yet I'm not hearing about that at all.   My conspiracy theory is that some places are working to suppress this information.   Plus, the ones we do hear about seem to be mainly people who are repentant and want to warn others.   What about people who don't care about warning others and don't want to look like idiots?   I bet in some cases they outnumber the warn-ers. 

I'm feeling somewhat cynical lately. 

[Arcadia]

53 minutes ago, kand said:

Do you live somewhere that there have been multiple serious epidemics? H1N1 is the only one in recent history I can think of, but I can’t think of ways it caused suffering in people not directly affected by an infected person. 

She is from Asia, naturalized citizen. Her only child has asthma so she really “freaks out” even over flu epidemics. It’s parental anxiety but at a higher level. We were all in countries affected by SARS and had gone through some “lockdown” measures during that time.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Arcadia
Typo

[Jean in Newcastle]

1 minute ago, Where's Toto? said:

I wonder if they draw the most ire because it's the gatherings that other people can see.   A huge gathering in your house, or even in your backyard, won't be noticed by as many people.   Lots of ire about the protests, but I kind of think that is deserved.    I'm also seeing ire about church gatherings.  Again, is it because those are the ones we hear about?  

On this or another thread, there was some talk about places hitting ICU capacity or big spikes, yet I'm not hearing about that at all.   My conspiracy theory is that some places are working to suppress this information.   Plus, the ones we do hear about seem to be mainly people who are repentant and want to warn others.   What about people who don't care about warning others and don't want to look like idiots?   I bet in some cases they outnumber the warn-ers. 

I'm feeling somewhat cynical lately. 

I had heard that one "It's all a hoax" influencer contracted COVID 19 and subsequently died.  It was noted on social media (which is how I heard about it from someone who had read the posts prior and after death from him and his supporters.  But then shortly after death, all those posts were deleted.  (Which I'm not necessarily condemning - I mean family is probably heartbroken.  But it does make a difference on how easily we can see the narrative.)

[Frances]

7 minutes ago, kand said:

I think their are several reasons we hear about the church ones. The main one to me is that religious services have been shown to be one of the particularly risky kinds of gatherings. There have been many super spreader events at religious services and it combines the danger factors of a large number of people in a contained space over a long period of time. Outdoor church services following social distancing would at this point probably be better received, as we’ve moved into an understanding that being outside seems to make spread significantly less likely, particularly if people are following distancing regulations.

This. The large outdoor worship service in my state received a permit on the condition they practice social distancing, even though the size was 40 times greater than what was normally allowed at the time. Then they didn’t do it. Not just sitting close, but hugging and holding hands. So yeah, you get special treatment, and then you abuse it.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Frances

[wathe]

29 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

I saw a clip on the news about a beach somewhere that the lifeguards were still supposed to rescue from water and if necessary give chest compressions, but not mouth-to-mouth; for that they said they had EMTs nearby for backup.

This is concerning.  CPR is an aerosol generating procedure.  If a patient codes in the hospital, we are NOT to start CPR  until we've properly donned PPE including n95 mask.  Asking a lifeguard to do something HCP won't/can't/aren;' allowed to do seems problematic.

[EmseB]

44 minutes ago, Where's Toto? said:

I wonder if they draw the most ire because it's the gatherings that other people can see.   A huge gathering in your house, or even in your backyard, won't be noticed by as many people.   Lots of ire about the protests, but I kind of think that is deserved.    I'm also seeing ire about church gatherings.  Again, is it because those are the ones we hear about?  

On this or another thread, there was some talk about places hitting ICU capacity or big spikes, yet I'm not hearing about that at all.   My conspiracy theory is that some places are working to suppress this information.   Plus, the ones we do hear about seem to be mainly people who are repentant and want to warn others.   What about people who don't care about warning others and don't want to look like idiots?   I bet in some cases they outnumber the warn-ers. 

I'm feeling somewhat cynical lately. 

I think the conspiracy theories about suppressing numbers are about on the level of pizzagate paranioa. You'd have to have every nurse, doctor, hospital admin, public health official, public health employee, anyone doing covid tests, etc., in on something like that to make it work. And you'd have to have public health officials who have been in service their whole careers then actively work to damage public health in order to...what? And all the news about furloughing hospital workers or field hospitals going unused would have to be made up. Not happening, no matter how political this gets.

Oh, and also all media and journalists would have to be in on suppression.

Edited May 24, 2020 by EmseB

[Wheres Toto]

4 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I think the conspiracy theories about suppressing numbers are about on the level of pizzagate paranioa. You'd have to have every nurse, doctor, hospital admin, public health official, public health employee, anyone doing covid tests, etc., in on something like that to make it work. And you'd have to have public health officials who have been in service their whole careers then actively work to damage public health in order to...what? And all the news about furloughing hospital workers or field hospitals going unused would have to be made up. Not happening, no matter how political this gets.

Oh, and also all media and journalists would have to be in on suppression.

I was being somewhat snarky with the conspiracy theory bit, but I do find it odd that nobody is talking about anyplace but NYC being a problem.   Only rarely is there information on the results of large gatherings and that seems to be only when someone decides to repent.    I haven't seen anything about hospitals anywhere else getting close to capacity.   I'm pretty sure the places furloughing hospital workers aren't the same places with ICU's almost at capacity, at least I hope not.    I'm also pretty sure the hospital workers in overwhelmed areas aren't out talking to the media or the ones making official reports.   They have other things to deal with.    If it's a "conspiracy"  it would be among the people being morons and not wanting to admit to being morons when it bites them in the a$$, or those more concerned with opening up so they want to make everything look fine. 

I guess we won't really know how this all went until it's over.  And even then we may not know all the answers. 

(When I say I haven't seen anything, I means I haven't seen anything except a comment or two on here).  

[ScoutTN]

22 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I think the conspiracy theories about suppressing numbers are about on the level of pizzagate paranioa. You'd have to have every nurse, doctor, hospital admin, public health official, public health employee, anyone doing covid tests, etc., in on something like that to make it work. And you'd have to have public health officials who have been in service their whole careers then actively work to damage public health in order to...what? And all the news about furloughing hospital workers or field hospitals going unused would have to be made up. Not happening, no matter how political this gets.

Oh, and also all media and journalists would have to be in on suppression.

Yes. State health dept and my city government are officially reporting relevent hospital data, but it is also available from the four or five main  hospitals (or hospital chains, since one is a huge multi-site deal) in my area. Plus, as pp said, the hospital staff talk. Impossible to suppress truth in this scenario, imo. Too many people involved.

Many hospitals here have furloughed or fired people. One is being sued for age discrimination in letting only older workers go. 

The three largest downtown hospitals and one small one have CV patients, but few of the outlying hospitals have had any at all. The county hospital nearest my mom has had zero CV and (before restrictions eased) laid off orcut hours for almost half their staff. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by ScoutTN

[Bootsie]

5 hours ago, Where's Toto? said:

That's probably the biggest thing about all this I don't understand.   IF you are in the "open up NOW" category, why wouldn't you be pushing masks?  That is the easiest way to control spread at this point.   I realize not everyone can wear masks, blah blah blah, but if those who can, do it could make a huge difference.

(I actually know the answer to my own confusion - people don't believe the virus is real, or going to affect them, or it's all a conspiracy, blah blah blah).

I had dinner last night with two physicians--both who have treated COVID-19 patients.  Both have had colleagues who have been infected.  One is affiliated with a major university teaching hospital.  Neither thought masks for the general public and outside of medical settings was helpful.  In fact, they had concerns about it.  They felt that people were touching their noses and eyes more; they were concerned of mold and other build-up on the masks, and they were concerned about contamination as people took off the masks and laid them down and then put them on again.  They felt that being as healthy as possible was important in case you should become infected because your outcome was likely to be better; one way to promote good health was a lot of fresh, outdoor air, in their opinion.  Their attitude was that, if it makes people feel better, masking indoors in public places is OK, but they thought masking outdoors was actually counterproductive.   When there are some in the medical field who have studied the matter and they are of the opinion that it isn't really helpful, it is easy to see why some in the general public are not pushing masks. 

[Arcadia]

My county was advocating stay home to saves lives and some people have been staying home for 69 days (since shelter in place started). My oncologist says it’s better for me to continue my daily outdoor strolling at my neighborhood green belt. I was getting physically sicker staying home  as my medication side effects worsen. My saying it’s doctor’s advice to walk with social distancing semi-placate my closer social circle. I am sure residents in neighboring counties like Napa with much lower counts aren’t as “freak out” about people going grocery shopping or going to nurseries, Lowe’s, Home Depot for plants. We go to a neighboring county to shop for groceries and plants sometimes and the tension is much lower. 

[Bootsie]

4 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

I don't think there's going to be very straightforward science about any of this, because how would you even study this in a controlled way? There's evidence, though. People are updating guidelines (too late, frankly) given the evidence. 

I think decreasing people's ability to implement public health measures will not increase local government ability to deal with a local outbreak. 

Current estimates are that there is a higher percentage of Texans currently infected than there are New Yorkers currently infected. People are wearing masks here not because it's currently worse here, but because they've gone through this already and it was traumatic. it would be much better if people wore masks before the trauma, not after. 

I'm glad you're wearing a mask! I hope it helps, too. Are others in your town doing so or no? 

ETA: OK, checking the numbers again, I'm probably wrong about there being more Texans than New Yorkers currently infected, although the numbers do look pretty similar and both are under a percent. Sorry!

Texas has about 29 million in population.  and New York has only about 19 million.  New York has current active cases of about 278,000; Texas is under 21,500 for current active cases.  Those numbers look very different.  New York has over 10 times as many active cases for only about 2/3 of the population of Texas.

[Frances]

7 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I had dinner last night with two physicians--both who have treated COVID-19 patients.  Both have had colleagues who have been infected.  One is affiliated with a major university teaching hospital.  Neither thought masks for the general public and outside of medical settings was helpful.  In fact, they had concerns about it.  They felt that people were touching their noses and eyes more; they were concerned of mold and other build-up on the masks, and they were concerned about contamination as people took off the masks and laid them down and then put them on again.  They felt that being as healthy as possible was important in case you should become infected because your outcome was likely to be better; one way to promote good health was a lot of fresh, outdoor air, in their opinion.  Their attitude was that, if it makes people feel better, masking indoors in public places is OK, but they thought masking outdoors was actually counterproductive.   When there are some in the medical field who have studied the matter and they are of the opinion that it isn't really helpful, it is easy to see why some in the general public are not pushing masks. 

But isn’t opening up primarily about indoor things like businesses? My liberal state is only requiring masks on public transportation and for store employees in customer facing businesses, since they are being exposed to so many people during their shifts. Stores can require masks for customers, in order to help protect their employees, but the government is not. And certainly they are not requiring masks at state parks, beaches, etc. They are asking people to maintain social distancing as much as possible, while gradually allowing larger groups, but asking, not requiring, people to wear masks when that is difficult. So primarily indoors.

While I understand the concerns you mention, I would not go so far as to say they have studied it. It sounds like they have thought about it and reached their conclusions, but not performed an actual study. It also seems like most of their concerns could be addressed with good public health campaigns. I think that’s why it likely works so well in some Asian countries. Everyone is getting the same consistent message, it’s not so location dependent as it is in the US.

[Ottakee]

2 hours ago, Matryoshka said:

I saw a clip on the news about a beach somewhere that the lifeguards were still supposed to rescue from water and if necessary give chest compressions, but not mouth-to-mouth; for that they said they had EMTs nearby for backup.

New CPR guidelines call for JUST chest compressions.  This was policy well before COVID as I was recertified last fall and it was no mouth to mouth.

[TCB]

27 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I had dinner last night with two physicians--both who have treated COVID-19 patients.  Both have had colleagues who have been infected.  One is affiliated with a major university teaching hospital.  Neither thought masks for the general public and outside of medical settings was helpful.  In fact, they had concerns about it.  They felt that people were touching their noses and eyes more; they were concerned of mold and other build-up on the masks, and they were concerned about contamination as people took off the masks and laid them down and then put them on again.  They felt that being as healthy as possible was important in case you should become infected because your outcome was likely to be better; one way to promote good health was a lot of fresh, outdoor air, in their opinion.  Their attitude was that, if it makes people feel better, masking indoors in public places is OK, but they thought masking outdoors was actually counterproductive.   When there are some in the medical field who have studied the matter and they are of the opinion that it isn't really helpful, it is easy to see why some in the general public are not pushing masks. 

I think that we don’t have great evidence either way for masks but unless they have recently made a study of it I don’t necessarily think that a lot of physicians have facts and figures about masks at their fingertips. It is all very prescribed by infection control about when, where and how to wear masks and most people just get on with the protocol without thinking much about it, unless they were ID Drs maybe.

[TCB]

14 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

As a side question.  I feel like I hear so often about the risks that doctors and nurses are taking, but I never hear about the respiratory therapists.  For my kid, the RT's are the ones who appear to be taking the biggest risks.  They're the ones setting up running the aerosolizing procedures. Why aren't they, and EMT's being sung as heroes in the same way?

Our RTs were asking the same thing during nurses week lol! But really the RTs are fantastic and deserve great praise!

[hopeallgoeswell]

32 minutes ago, Frances said:

But isn’t opening up primarily about indoor things like businesses? My liberal state is only requiring masks on public transportation and for store employees in customer facing businesses, since they are being exposed to so many people during their shifts. Stores can require masks for customers, in order to help protect their employees, but the government is not. And certainly they are not requiring masks at state parks, beaches, etc. They are asking people to maintain social distancing as much as possible, while gradually allowing larger groups, but asking, not requiring, people to wear masks when that is difficult. So primarily indoors.

While I understand the concerns you mention, I would not go so far as to say they have studied it. It sounds like they have thought about it and reached their conclusions, but not performed an actual study. It also seems like most of their concerns could be addressed with good public health campaigns. I think that’s why it likely works so well in some Asian countries. Everyone is getting the same consistent message, it’s not so location dependent as it is in the US.

Maybe they had a study like this in mind?  This study has two other studies linked, which refer to N95 and medical masks.  PubMed has a rabbit trail of similar studies. 
“In the univariate analysis, all outcomes were significantly higher in the cloth mask group, compared with the medical masks group. After adjusting for other factors, ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) remained significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/#!po=50.0000

[wathe]

41 minutes ago, Ottakee said:

New CPR guidelines call for JUST chest compressions.  This was policy well before COVID as I was recertified last fall and it was no mouth to mouth.

I think lifeguarding standards might be different than standard first-aid standards though.  Lifeguards might be dealing with submerged non-breathing victims.  30:2 compressions to ventilations still seems to be current by Canadian Lifeguarding standards. (pulled from current Lifesaving Society website)

ETA - just chest compressions alone are considered to be an AGMP in the hospital.  We don full PPE/n95 before starting chest compressions.  So even if lifeguards aren't doing rescue breathing (whether by bag-valve-mask or mouth to mouth), they are still being asked to do a risky manouver that HCP would not do without PPE.

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by wathe

[Frances]

5 minutes ago, hopeallgoeswell said:

Maybe they had a study like this in mind?  This study has two other studies linked, which refer to N95 and medical masks.  PubMed has a rabbit trail of similar studies. 
“In the univariate analysis, all outcomes were significantly higher in the cloth mask group, compared with the medical masks group. After adjusting for other factors, ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) remained significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/#!po=50.0000

Hopefully we will get to a place where the best quality masks are available for all. Early on the South Korean government was able to work with manufacturers to ramp up n95 to levels that not only allowed for sufficient supplies at hospitals, but also every person was able to buy two per week at cost at their local pharmacy or post office. When family members who live in Japan wear them, they are not wearing homemade cloth masks, but regular surgical ones or n95s.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Frances

[TCB]

7 minutes ago, hopeallgoeswell said:

Maybe they had a study like this in mind?  This study has two other studies linked, which refer to N95 and medical masks.  PubMed has a rabbit trail of similar studies. 
“In the univariate analysis, all outcomes were significantly higher in the cloth mask group, compared with the medical masks group. After adjusting for other factors, ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) remained significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/#!po=50.0000

I think that was the study done in Vietnam. That seemed pretty conclusive that cloth masks do not protect HCWs as well as surgical masks from getting viruses they are exposed to. That seems to make sense.

I think that the whole premise for the general public wearing masks in enclosed areas is to primarily stop them spreading the virus and not really protecting them much from getting it. So of course it seems like it will only really help if sick people are wearing them.

[Frances]

Just now, TCB said:

I think that was the study done in Vietnam. That seemed pretty conclusive that cloth masks do not protect HCWs as well as surgical masks from getting viruses they are exposed to. That seems to make sense.

I think that the whole premise for the general public wearing masks in enclosed areas is to primarily stop them spreading the virus and not really protecting them much from getting it. So of course it seems like it will only really help if sick people are wearing them.

Even before this my dental hygienist wore a surgical mask and a face shield. So it certainly doesn’t seem surprising that in a healthcare setting, a mask specifically designed for that setting would work better than a homemade cloth mask.

[EmseB]

27 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, projections are extremely flawed. That doesn't mean we aren't supposed to use our brains to figure out what's happening.

Actually, the media did an awful job of highlighting the bad. In February, the media was in deep denial, along with the rest of the US. DH says that some epidemiologists he was reading on Twitter were sounding the alarm, but as someone who consumes the news, I had NO IDEA that there was a decent chance coronavirus was already in NYC. I really didn't. And if that had been clearly spelled out by "the media", I would have known. 

Yes, right now, the media is worried. They could be wrong again. But they weren't always on the pessimistic side of things. I wouldn't assume they are this time, either. 

I don't mean this to sound insulting, but I honestly don't know how people didn't know it was here. Flights come in from China daily to multiple airports in the US. As soon as the first ban was announced here my thought was, well, it already has to be here and probably a lot of it and it presents like an illness alot of people are likely to ignore at first... it's got to be all over the place. It baffled me that everyone didn't realize that. Not to toot my own horn because I guess I also in my own mind did not think of it as being quite as severe as it was. 

My DH is a math guy and as he was watching the numbers reported in China he was giving everyone saying that it wasn't that bad a side eye. I know you're a math person too, but honestly the only people I knew who were nervous about downplaying this in Jan/Feb were people with a background in numbers.

Edited May 24, 2020 by EmseB

[wathe]

1 hour ago, Ottakee said:

New CPR guidelines call for JUST chest compressions.  This was policy well before COVID as I was recertified last fall and it was no mouth to mouth.

Thinking about this further:  CPR guidelines for lay-rescuers may be chest compressions only.  But professional CPR (by paramedic in the field, or HCP in hospital) absolutely still includes ventilation as well as chest compressions.   One could argue that lifeguards are rescuing professionally - it is an essential part of their paid job.   I wonder if that's why standards might be different?

[hopeallgoeswell]

8 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

But that's cloth masks compared to medical masks, not cloth masks compared to no masks. And it's in a medical setting, not at home. 

I think if we look at the results from the Asian countries and even at the results in Asian populations in hard-hit cities, it is obvious that there are personal responsibility measures that make a difference. What are they exactly? We don't know for sure. But masks are an obvious one to try. 

Here's a write up of this using two local neighborhoods; 

https://thecity.nyc/2020/05/the-life-and-death-divide-between-flushing-and-corona.html

That is why I linked this study and referred to the masks that I did. The doctors may be more aware of what different masking outcomes are in their setting (HCW) and extrapolating to the general population, not having any concrete data on cloth masking indoors v. no mask for the ordinary Joe.

 

As far as the article you shared, there looks like there could very well be confounding factors at play, such as skin color (Asian v. Latino...if vitamin D has a role) and overall hygiene (masking v. working while sick).  So you are right, we don’t know for sure.  

Also, and this is off-topic but calls attention to the reporting, it starts out about the similarities between the groups: “Both are high-density areas with similar socioeconomic profiles. They’re linked by the usually crowded No. 7 train.

Nearly half of workers in both neighborhoods are employed in food service, construction, cleaning and transportation — jobs that New York State has deemed essential through the pandemic.

Residents of both places typically have household income below the Queens median and a similar share of people who lack health insurance, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau. And almost half of apartments and houses in both areas have more than one occupant per room, the Census definition of crowded.” 

But then says near the end, “What’s happening right now with both Latino and African Americans is a good illustration of the power of the social determinants, economic, environmental and structural determinants of health. Things like poverty levels, access to food — especially healthy food. And right now, for many, many families it’s just food, any kind of food,” said Dr. Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola, director of the UC Davis Center for Reducing Health Disparities.”

So those things don’t matter if you’re Asian now? Only if you’re Latino or African American? I’m not asking you, specifically; just thinking out loud.  I have enjoyed the discussions on this board 😉!

[Shoeless]

7 hours ago, DoraBora said:

People in your town are yelling at you about wearing a mask?  Where do you live?  I'm a native Texan, and though every person in our state is imperfect, it's been my experience that we're a pretty friendly bunch.  That is very sad and I'm sorry you're experiencing such hostility!

You probably know this, but masks and distancing cannot legally be enforced by any city or county in Texas, per Gov. Abbott's order.  I think that's a good thing, though you probably disagree.  I wouldn't yell at you about our differences of opinion, nor would I suggest you leave.  🙂

 

I live in a small town between San Antonio and Austin. My husband is a native Texan from another small town in Victoria county, and his friends there are reporting the same thing; being challenged and insulted while wearing a mask at the store.  These are also native Texans.  

Up until covid, people in these towns were super nice and friendly.  It was one of the best parts of living here and made life very stress-free. Since covid, I've seen some of the most horrendous, rude behavior I've ever witnessed in my entire life.  Like, a woman screaming at the clerk at the post office because the 6 ft social distance markers on the floor made the line too long, and people yelling at each other in HEB over lord knows what.  It was loud enough that the entire front of the store stopped and stared. 

I've been called a socialist, a nazi, a "sheeple". I was also the topic of a lecture from a homeschool dad at the store to his son.  The kid recognized me but the dad did not.  I felt bad for the kid because he looked mortified as his dad banged on about how people like me don't have critical thinking skills and react only to fear, like an animal. 

I'm not sure why you brought up legal enforcement or why you assume what my stance would be on that matter.  It feels like you are trying to bait me into an argument about the constitutionality of this situation, and I'm not interested in that fight. 

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, Frances said:

But isn’t opening up primarily about indoor things like businesses? My liberal state is only requiring masks on public transportation and for store employees in customer facing businesses, since they are being exposed to so many people during their shifts. Stores can require masks for customers, in order to help protect their employees, but the government is not. And certainly they are not requiring masks at state parks, beaches, etc. They are asking people to maintain social distancing as much as possible, while gradually allowing larger groups, but asking, not requiring, people to wear masks when that is difficult. So primarily indoors.

While I understand the concerns you mention, I would not go so far as to say they have studied it. It sounds like they have thought about it and reached their conclusions, but not performed an actual study. It also seems like most of their concerns could be addressed with good public health campaigns. I think that’s why it likely works so well in some Asian countries. Everyone is getting the same consistent message, it’s not so location dependent as it is in the US.

When I said that they had studied the issue I did not mean that they had personally conducted a study on the use of masks by the general public.  What I meant was that they have studied existing literature and knowledge base regarding masks, lung health, epidemiology, etc. and do not believe that mask wearing by the general population is helpful and may create additional problems, especially when it is done while people are spending time outdoors.  They are intelligent, thoughtful, highly educated people who are sincerely wanting what is best for their patients, their colleagues, and themselves.  I do not know if their analysis is correct or not.  But, I do not think it is correct to conclude that people who are not pushing for mask wearing are into conspiracy theories, don't believe COVID-19 exists, are uncaring, have political motivations, or some of the other statements I have been seeing being made.   

[Frances]

Just now, Bootsie said:

When I said that they had studied the issue I did not mean that they had personally conducted a study on the use of masks by the general public.  What I meant was that they have studied existing literature and knowledge base regarding masks, lung health, epidemiology, etc. and do not believe that mask wearing by the general population is helpful and may create additional problems, especially when it is done while people are spending time outdoors.  They are intelligent, thoughtful, highly educated people who are sincerely wanting what is best for their patients, their colleagues, and themselves.  I do not know if their analysis is correct or not.  But, I do not think it is correct to conclude that people who are not pushing for mask wearing are into conspiracy theories, don't believe COVID-19 exists, are uncaring, have political motivations, or some of the other statements I have been seeing being made.   

As far as I know, mask wearing outdoors is more in areas where there is dense population. In my liberal state, it’s not required outdoors at all. And I think people are not wearing or advocating for masks for all sorts of reasons. It sounds like your friends have carefully examined the issue and have the background to do so. Like anything else, I’m not sure that can be said of everyone out there.

[Shoeless]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

Oh, I am sorry :-(. That sounds very fraught and stressful. I can't tell you how much I wish that this hadn't become a political issue. 

 

I think it's so stupid this has become a political issue. 

I could also do with 100% less of people insisting that because their little corner of the world is humming along nicely that anyone else who's experiencing a problem must be exaggerating, misunderstanding, or outright lying about what's happening.  😠      

[DoraBora]

32 minutes ago, MissLemon said:

 

I live in a small town between San Antonio and Austin. My husband is a native Texan from another small town in Victoria county, and his friends there are reporting the same thing; being challenged and insulted while wearing a mask at the store.  These are also native Texans.  

Up until covid, people in these towns were super nice and friendly.  It was one of the best parts of living here and made life very stress-free. Since covid, I've seen some of the most horrendous, rude behavior I've ever witnessed in my entire life.  Like, a woman screaming at the clerk at the post office because the 6 ft social distance markers on the floor made the line too long, and people yelling at each other in HEB over lord knows what.  It was loud enough that the entire front of the store stopped and stared. 

I've been called a socialist, a nazi, a "sheeple". I was also the topic of a lecture from a homeschool dad at the store to his son.  The kid recognized me but the dad did not.  I felt bad for the kid because he looked mortified as his dad banged on about how people like me don't have critical thinking skills and react only to fear, like an animal. 

I'm not sure why you brought up legal enforcement or why you assume what my stance would be on that matter.  It feels like you are trying to bait me into an argument about the constitutionality of this situation, and I'm not interested in that fight. 

I'm very sorry you have had these experiences.  I should have known better than to include info about being a native and expecting people to be (generally) kind here.  I've traveled a fair bit, and most people (at least everywhere I've been) are generally kind, though in times of great stress, anger (which is often just fear acting out) does surface.

I brought up legal enforcement only because you mentioned that your town is planning a public Independence Day celebration at which you said masks and distancing are recommended but won't be enforced.  I gathered, perhaps incorrectly, that you thought this unwise, so I pointed out that your town cannot legally enforce either.

It really isn't my style to try to bait anyone into an argument.  I'm not a hostile person.  I just thought I was sharing my point of view and I apologize for making you angry.

 

 

 

[Frances]

9 minutes ago, StellaM said:

I'd still like all the thoughtful, intelligent people to make some other suggestions re high density public transport.

I am not joking when I say the current advice here (where masks are not even mentioned) is 'don't take public transport'.

I want actual suggestions, from the mask pooh-pooh'ers, for safety on city buses, trams and trains.

Public transportation is the only time it’s required in my state for the general population.

[J-rap]

3 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I had dinner last night with two physicians--both who have treated COVID-19 patients.  Both have had colleagues who have been infected.  One is affiliated with a major university teaching hospital.  Neither thought masks for the general public and outside of medical settings was helpful.  In fact, they had concerns about it.  They felt that people were touching their noses and eyes more; they were concerned of mold and other build-up on the masks, and they were concerned about contamination as people took off the masks and laid them down and then put them on again.  They felt that being as healthy as possible was important in case you should become infected because your outcome was likely to be better; one way to promote good health was a lot of fresh, outdoor air, in their opinion.  Their attitude was that, if it makes people feel better, masking indoors in public places is OK, but they thought masking outdoors was actually counterproductive.   When there are some in the medical field who have studied the matter and they are of the opinion that it isn't really helpful, it is easy to see why some in the general public are not pushing masks. 

It's very likely that you'll hear different opinions from different doctors.  But there's the other side too.  My brother is a pulmonary research doctor at one of the nation's leading hospitals, and he does encourage wearing cloth face masks when in close contact with others, as does his entire institution.  He was actually one of the lead research doctors working with scientists across the country on what type of materials found at home would provide some protection.  Now, it could be we'll find information down the road that proves it's not as helpful as we'd hoped, but for now, based on a lot of scientific minds, this seems to be a good option to try when there is actually nothing else at all (besides a complete lock-down).  And, such an easy thing to do.

If your child was dying and the doctor said, I have something he can try that could very well help him a lot and will absolutely do no harm at all, and that ongoing studies show is helpful even though it's not 100% proven yet, wouldn't you try it?

Also, even if you might not be finding the "official" studies you're looking for, you can be sure these studies are being done.  They're just being done at a fast pace and so don't follow the usual protocol.  

My brother also studies droplet spread, and what current conditions in a person make them less likely to become seriously ill.  He's very involved.

ETA:  I meant to add that I know you weren't stating that what you heard was your opinion, so I don't mean to get down on you!  Just responding to what the doctor friends of yours were saying.  These are such crazy times and we hear so many things...  So I wanted to present the other side.

Sorry, another ETA:  If it makes any difference, my brother is a Republican and a conservative Christian and probably voted for Trump, and he still strongly supports face masks.  🙂 

Edited May 25, 2020 by J-rap

[DoraBora]

10 minutes ago, MissLemon said:

I think it's so stupid this has become a political issue. 

I could also do with 100% less of people insisting that because their little corner of the world is humming along nicely that anyone else who's experiencing a problem must be exaggerating, misunderstanding, or outright lying about what's happening.  😠      

FWIW, I'm not insisting on that.  (You may be talking about someone else.)  I'm just surprised that you are quietly going about your business in a mask and that your fellow small-town citizens are calling you names and yelling at you.  I believe you, it's just mind-boggling.

Again, I'm sorry that has happened to you.

[Shoeless]

6 hours ago, Dreamergal said:

I am sorry. Can your town be called in Texas speak as "podunk" town that even locals from urban areas sneeringly and not so politely refer to as. 

I would also seek to understand why people are feeling that way and look at demographics and cases. In TX not every county has COVID as you probably know. There are like 20 plus counties last I checked not reporting a case . Is it a little town with more cows than people kinda town ?  If social distancing automatically happens because you have so much land and you can't see your neighbor and the number of cases low people might think it happens in the big cities only. Yes, I know the argument about people passing by and rural hospitals not being equipped and agree with it. But who is not wearing a mask ? A store clerk should. Not a lonely farmer harvesting in his field. Lastly, what is your temperature ? People barely wear any clothes in summer here, even us. Asking people to wear a mask when it is going to be difficult when it is heading towards repeated days in the 90s or even 100s. 

I am not an expert more a novice in stats. So here are the latest. 

https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/3f048ced32804271aafe8b9640bcb4a7

 

My county only has about 125 cumulative cases. I think my town has less than 10.  So yes, the odds are extremely low that I will contract covid.  And I would not blink about a farmer not wearing a mask here, because why would s/he? I visited outside with a friend a few weeks ago, and we did not wear masks.  We just stayed 6 feet apart and stood so the wind was blowing away from us.  No issues there.

But inside a store like Walgreens, yes, wear a mask.  Walgreens is small. Maybe you don't need to wear a mask inside a big store, like Home Depot where there is good air circulation and people can spread out.  

I'm too grumpy right now to fully articulate my thoughts, but briefly, my position is this: not every place is NYC and Long Island, and not every place is rural Texas. Whatever guidelines are issued by government should take into consideration what is happening in those locations, with the understanding that guidelines may need to change depending on the developing situation.   

[Shoeless]

2 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

And for the record, as I've mentioned, I do have a (liberal) former friend who is convinced this is all a hoax and she was VERY negative on mask wearing. So it definitely happens all over the place, not just in red states. 

 

Agreed. I have family in Nassau and Suffolk counties in NY.  They commute into NYC for work and are convinced the whole thing is exaggerated or a hoax, and there is nothing you can say to convince them otherwise. 

[Frances]

12 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

I think people are looking at cases and getting complacent ? We need more campaigns that explain clearly what are the risks ? For instance how many people are even aware of the singing danger. I live in an urban metro and while it is no NY, as expected in a denser demographic, we have a large number of cases. So people here mask up a lot. What I see more often is people wearing masks and not covering up their noses. Now what is the use of that ? 

I think county wise guidelines are the best with things like masks and closures, perhaps state level.  People should not be weaponizing or politicizing this though. I am sorry though for the response you got. That bothers me most of all. 

While I agree with county and state level guidelines, I don’t think strong, consistent federal messages on how to wear masks properly and why they are important for successful re-opening and leading by example would hurt at all.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Frances

[Shoeless]

20 minutes ago, DoraBora said:

I'm very sorry you have had these experiences.  I should have known better than to include info about being a native and expecting people to be (generally) kind here.  I've traveled a fair bit, and most people (at least everywhere I've been) are generally kind, though in times of great stress, anger (which is often just fear acting out) does surface.

I brought up legal enforcement only because you mentioned that your town is planning a public Independence Day celebration at which you said masks and distancing are recommended but won't be enforced.  I gathered, perhaps incorrectly, that you thought this unwise, so I pointed out that your town cannot legally enforce either.

It really isn't my style to try to bait anyone into an argument.  I'm not a hostile person.  I just thought I was sharing my point of view and I apologize for making you angry.

 

 

 

 

I think the parade and fireworks show is a bad idea from the start. Philadelphia demonstrated that 100+ years ago. If they insist on going forward with a parade, then they are going to need to either limit viewing or extend the route, so everyone can spread out.  They don't want to do either of those things, so the only other option would be to have everyone wear a mask.  They don't want to do that either. Basically, everyone wants life to be like it was before and they don't want to have to think about covid at all.  When presented with any option to adjust to the situation, people have complained "But that's not how we've traditionally done it!" or "You can't force us to do that!" 

We have a chicken processing plant here that, so far, has not been impacted by covid. I am very worried for the people that work there.  Our local hospital has *NINE* ICU beds and will not be able to handle it if an outbreak occurs at the chicken plant. It's probably social distancing, the weather, and a bit of luck that has kept an outbreak from popping up there.  If we go forward with large public gatherings and take zero precautions, then we may not be so lucky any longer. 

 

[Bootsie]

40 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I suppose I'd need to ask what their political affiliation to get more of a sense on the bolded ;-). I don't think you need to be a sheep or a conspiracy theorist to want your political party to be in the right. Of course, if that doesn't match here, I withdraw my objection. I just know this to be a confirmation bias I occasionally have. 

As for studying the literature, I'm going to default to my original opinion, which is that doctors are in my experience don't have to use complicated math day to day and don't tend to be people who are very numerically proficient in the first place. (Pre-med student have a certain reputation with people teaching calculus, lol.) So I would guess they aren't getting more out of the studies than I am. 

I am not assuming they aren't well-intentioned, by the way. I'm just don't know if they are more qualified than anyone else to judge. And if they are right, I'm going to be disappointed, because it's going to be either masks or social distancing, and I would personally prefer masks. 

I do not think that they would claim that they were more qualified than anyone else to judge. They know full well that others have differing opinions and they admit that there is a lot that no one knows at this point.  They are able to listen to the views of others and continue to learn.  

As far as political parties, they aren't Americans and do not live in the US.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Bootsie

[Arcadia]

@mathnerd@sassenach when I started work in the 90s, outsourcing to cheaper nations were already common. Work from home is just going to make it easier.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/05/22/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-power-move-may-be-the-biggest-game-changer-for-the-job-market/

“It’s becoming clear that the “gift” of remote work may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Let’s face facts, Zuckerburg and Dorsey didn’t become multimillionaires because they’re nice. They are sharp, aggressive, genius wolves dressed in T-shirts, jeans and hoodies. They know that a person can work from home in San Francisco, North Dakota, Iowa, Utah, England or India. It’s been proven that the available technology, such as Zoom videos, Slack and other products, make it easy to work from anywhere in the world and seamlessly connect with co-workers and managers. 

Zuckerberg can now scout for talent all over the country and world. This could be the worst trend for workers, as CEOs arbitrage the best, cheapest job seekers globally. Facebook will source job applicants who possess all of the right skills and experience and live in lower-cost places and pay them less money then they’d receive working in San Francisco. Dorsey was upfront about this stating, “We can get talent anywhere. There’s a lot of folks out there that do not want to move to San Francisco. They feel comfortable working in a much smaller office or just home.”

This will cause a ripple of serious repercussions. Salaries for workers in San Francisco and other large cities may fall due to the introduction of job seekers that weren’t previously considered. Compensation may also be suppressed due to the overhang of over 39 million Americans who are out of work. 

It’s also telling that Facebook just launched a new group video chat product, Messenger Rooms.This looks like it’s specifically designed to compete against Zoom, Skype, Google Meet and Microsoft Teams. Conveniently, Facebook’s own employees can create a video chat room and invite up to 50 people to join a video call. It will make it easier for their remote workers and also steal market share from Zoom, which has become the Covid-19 breakout success story.

A large number of companies, including Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, Capital One, Amazon, Microsoft, Zillow and others have all announced that they’ll extend their work-from-home programs. They most likely will follow Zuckerberg and Dorsey’s lead by seeking out talent that live in lower-cost places, so they can bring down their costs. In light of the economic hit companies have taken due to the effects of Covid-19, saving money has become a top priority.

On the flip side, there is some positive news. Job seekers will have more opportunities—albeit along with greater competition—as they can apply to jobs anywhere in the United States. If you see a job advertisement for a position outside of where you reside, feel free to submit your résumé. The odds are that most companies will adopt this remote-work strategy and consider candidates from various locations. This trend will free you from being relegated to only applying to jobs within commuting distance.”

[Frances]

2 hours ago, Arcadia said:

@mathnerd@sassenach when I started work in the 90s, outsourcing to cheaper nations were already common. Work from home is just going to make it easier.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/05/22/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerbergs-power-move-may-be-the-biggest-game-changer-for-the-job-market/

“It’s becoming clear that the “gift” of remote work may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Let’s face facts, Zuckerburg and Dorsey didn’t become multimillionaires because they’re nice. They are sharp, aggressive, genius wolves dressed in T-shirts, jeans and hoodies. They know that a person can work from home in San Francisco, North Dakota, Iowa, Utah, England or India. It’s been proven that the available technology, such as Zoom videos, Slack and other products, make it easy to work from anywhere in the world and seamlessly connect with co-workers and managers. 

Zuckerberg can now scout for talent all over the country and world. This could be the worst trend for workers, as CEOs arbitrage the best, cheapest job seekers globally. Facebook will source job applicants who possess all of the right skills and experience and live in lower-cost places and pay them less money then they’d receive working in San Francisco. Dorsey was upfront about this stating, “We can get talent anywhere. There’s a lot of folks out there that do not want to move to San Francisco. They feel comfortable working in a much smaller office or just home.”

This will cause a ripple of serious repercussions. Salaries for workers in San Francisco and other large cities may fall due to the introduction of job seekers that weren’t previously considered. Compensation may also be suppressed due to the overhang of over 39 million Americans who are out of work. 

It’s also telling that Facebook just launched a new group video chat product, Messenger Rooms.This looks like it’s specifically designed to compete against Zoom, Skype, Google Meet and Microsoft Teams. Conveniently, Facebook’s own employees can create a video chat room and invite up to 50 people to join a video call. It will make it easier for their remote workers and also steal market share from Zoom, which has become the Covid-19 breakout success story.

A large number of companies, including Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, Capital One, Amazon, Microsoft, Zillow and others have all announced that they’ll extend their work-from-home programs. They most likely will follow Zuckerberg and Dorsey’s lead by seeking out talent that live in lower-cost places, so they can bring down their costs. In light of the economic hit companies have taken due to the effects of Covid-19, saving money has become a top priority.

On the flip side, there is some positive news. Job seekers will have more opportunities—albeit along with greater competition—as they can apply to jobs anywhere in the United States. If you see a job advertisement for a position outside of where you reside, feel free to submit your résumé. The odds are that most companies will adopt this remote-work strategy and consider candidates from various locations. This trend will free you from being relegated to only applying to jobs within commuting distance.”

I guess I though most of this was already happening. The largest growing city in my state is full of people who work for tech companies based in CA. I follow the blog of someone who works for a US based tech company purposefully employees people all over the world. They have yearly staff meetings in a different country every year. According to my friends who work for a big user of H1B visas, the company has long been hiring whoever they want from anywhere in the world by gaming the system. There have also been news stories about companies replacing US programmers with H1B holders from Indian outsourcing companies. I guess maybe they can just be more open about all of it now.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Frances

[Corraleno]

37 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

On the flip side, there is some positive news. Job seekers will have more opportunities—albeit along with greater competition—as they can apply to jobs anywhere in the United States. If you see a job advertisement for a position outside of where you reside, feel free to submit your résumé. The odds are that most companies will adopt this remote-work strategy and consider candidates from various locations. This trend will free you from being relegated to only applying to jobs within commuting distance.”

Some people who live and work in super high COL areas may also be quite happy to take a pay cut in order to move to a much lower COL area, since they may still come out ahead financially, with extra bonuses like less traffic, less stress, more land, cheaper colleges for their kids, etc. And if it becomes a serious trend, it may also relieve some of the pressure on housing in these super HCOL areas, making housing more affordable for those who do stay.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Corraleno

[Arcadia]

7 minutes ago, Frances said:

. According to my friends who work for a big user of H1B visas, the company has long been hiring whoever they want from anywhere in the world by gaming the system. There have also been news stories about companies replacing US programmers with H1B holders from Indian outsourcing companies. I guess maybe they can just be more open about all of it now.

I am very familiar with two of those India outsourcing companies as my former employer works with them. These companies are heavy lobbyists in India, US and other countries.  Now they don’t need to bring them into US so people who want to migrate through the H1 route would have less chances. 

[math teacher]

Small town in Texas here and I am seeing fewer masks all the time. I am one of two people who have a mask on at school.

[Arcadia]

24 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Most tech companies have a heavy presence in India. They don't need visas for people to come here for work like before. They can just recruit there and transfer work.

A friend came here on H1 through an outsourcing company as their client needed a system admin onsite.  The outsourcing company is one of those listed in this article https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/visa-and-immigration/h-1b-extension-rejections-rob-indian-it-firms-of-visa-power/articleshow/68312136.cms

[Shoeless]

55 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

gently, the opposite is also true.  When someone insists they’re doing great and their area isn’t struggling with the reopening and hasn’t seen a spike, that’s legit too.  And I’ve worn my mask out to the hospital, store, gas station, and restaurants, no prob and zero weird looks or abuse.

This is very very regional, and making generalizations about people’s experiences doesn’t work well.

 

I am not making a generalization about other areas, nor do I doubt that other locations aren't struggling. It was asked by another poster exactly where people were experiencing trouble over masks, because they only saw people happily complying with the recommendations. Well, I live in a place where people aren't happily complying. 

As for re-opening, Texas has been stable, despite the constant Impending Doom Reports from the media predicting a NYC style meltdown any day now.  I feel like many media outlets would be really excited to see a big state like Texas fail spectacularly. 

I'm actually way more concerned about what's going on in Illinois than I am about Texas right now. 

 

[Shoeless]

5 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I have heard this reasoning often.  That if I express concern about something, it means I want the bad outcome to happen.  Why would people feel that way?  

 

Because some people are mean? Schadenfreude is a real thing. 

My point above is that I've seen a lot of media reports reporting "surges" and "spikes" in Texas, while not reporting much of anything about a place with twice as many new daily cases.  I think that's kind of weird. 

[MEmama]

9 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Some people who live and work in super high COL areas may also be quite happy to take a pay cut in order to move to a much lower COL area, since they may still come out ahead financially, with extra bonuses like less traffic, less stress, more land, cheaper colleges for their kids, etc. And if it becomes a serious trend, it may also relieve some of the pressure on housing in these super HCOL areas, making housing more affordable for those who do stay.

Yeah, my DS is taking this into consideration as he plans ahead for a computer engineering degree. Opportunities for remote working appeal to him. Life balance is something we stress, especially because he is motivated and looking toward a competitive field.
 

Also, pettily and selfishly, I hate what the tech boom has done to SF; I don’t even recognize it any more when I go home. I’d love to see some of the city’s soul return, although I realize it’s probably gone for good. 😞 Of course I don’t want to see a crash there either, but I’m not sure that’s where we are headed as a result of opening up remote opportunities even more. 

[Arcadia]

17 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Some people who live and work in super high COL areas may also be quite happy to take a pay cut in order to move to a much lower COL area, since they may still come out ahead financially, with extra bonuses like less traffic, less stress, more land, cheaper colleges for their kids, etc. And if it becomes a serious trend, it may also relieve some of the pressure on housing in these super HCOL areas, making housing more affordable for those who do stay.

I am worried about my friends back in my country of origin. Some have lost their jobs to cheaper labor in neighboring countries. Computer engineers from Bangkok, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Cyberjaya are all much cheaper.  

What I have seen happened while working for blue chips companies is that they hire the cheaper labor and then retrench in the name of restructuring a few months later. So they maintain or reduce headcount but eliminate the more expensive workers. A friend in UK has a staff that are all based in India because of cost cutting way before COVID19. She is working from home so they are paying her a work from home rate that is adjusted for UK taxes. 

I would love to move to a cheaper location as long as there is good medical care being the “sickly person” that I am since birth. I won’t mind if real estate where I am gets cheaper. However, I have seen in my country of origin that it lead to job losses among those who are higher pay due to seniority. 

[Arcadia]

8 hours ago, MEmama said:

Also, pettily and selfishly, I hate what the tech boom has done to SF; I don’t even recognize it any more when I go home. I’d love to see some of the city’s soul return, although I realize it’s probably gone for good. 😞 Of course I don’t want to see a crash there either, but I’m not sure that’s where we are headed as a result of opening up remote opportunities even more. 

I live near Sunnyvale and Mountain View, and farmland has mostly become residential apartments or homes. The Cisco buildings that were sold became apartment buildings. SF Chinatown might be able to preserve its culture. I actually like Sausalito, it still has an old world charm. 

SF has a homeless issue and they would need the tax from SF residents and businesses to fund all the services. People are wondering what happens to Salesforce tower if companies don’t need it anymore (ETA: as in the rental/property tax revenue).  

Edited May 25, 2020 by Arcadia

[prairiewindmomma]

My heart falls and my stomach churns when I read about the push to "work from home" in the tech sector.  We've seen a shift in the last decade.  In house jobs moved to contract work.  The contractor firms offer many fewer benefits---insurance is more expensive and pays out less, contract workers are easily furloughed without pay & on little notice, no profit sharing accrues. Now that work is going to be easier to shift overseas.  Let's be honest, this is a driving down of salaries in the tech field.  They will hire foreign workers that they pay $15-30k a year instead of US workers.  This process has already started to happen.

This same process happened in the legal field twenty years ago.  Tens of thousands of lawyers lost their jobs as the market contracted post 9/11. The major law firms all consolidated, the research and writing jobs went overseas, and only the partners benefited.  The remaining associates go through the churn and burn. A handful will be able to buy in and make partner and the rest are thrown out after working 60-100 hour workweeks.  Some lawyers have been able to specialize and do boutique work, but the market is not the same that it was.

The tech market is doing the same.  Either you specialize and have some awesome skills that are worth keeping you on, or the work is starting to be sent overseas. The problem is that it takes experience over time to develop those awesome skills and specializations and if you don't ever have that door opened for you for entry level work, it's hard to make that leap. 

I really hate that the PR firms are framing this as an argument against expensive housing or as allowing the non-coastal areas to thrive. It's not really that at all.

[prairiewindmomma]

19 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Some people who live and work in super high COL areas may also be quite happy to take a pay cut in order to move to a much lower COL area, since they may still come out ahead financially, with extra bonuses like less traffic, less stress, more land, cheaper colleges for their kids, etc. And if it becomes a serious trend, it may also relieve some of the pressure on housing in these super HCOL areas, making housing more affordable for those who do stay.

As someone who has looked at these salary gaps pretty extensively over the last five years in one niche of the tech sector (and have had to make two cross-country moves as a result of these gaps) I don't think this is as rosy of a picture as the reality.

And, on the flip side, look at what has happened to Austin, TX.  Austin's housing prices in 2005 were very appealing.  By 2010, they had shot up pretty astronomically.  In 2015, housing prices were approaching west coast ones in Austin itself, less so in the suburbs.  Now.....some of those prices are just as high as coast prices. Lots of the tech firms have moved jobs there where they are paying Texas salaries.  People cashed out of their west coast houses and drove up the market because they had cash on hand to outbid each other. Some tech firms have started to run shuttle buses from San Antonio to Austin because housing is so much cheaper in San Antonio, San Marcos, etc.